As Americans head to the polls this November, their values and basic beliefs are more polarized along partisan lines than at any point in the past 25 years. Unlike in 1987, when this series of surveys began, the values gap between Republicans and Democrats is now greater than gender, age, race or class divides.

Overall, there has been much more stability than change across the 48 political values measures that the Pew Research Center has tracked since 1987. But the average partisan gap has nearly doubled over this 25-year period – from 10 percentage points in 1987 to 18 percentage points in the new study.

Nearly all of the increases have occurred during the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. During this period, both parties’ bases have often been critical of their parties for not standing up for their traditional positions. Currently, 71% of Republicans and 58% of Democrats say their parties have not done a good job in this regard.

With regard to the broad spectrum of values, basic demographic divisions – along lines such as gender, race, ethnicity, religion and class – are no wider than they have ever been. Men and women, whites, blacks and Hispanics, the highly religious and the less religious, and those with more and less education differ in many respects. However, these differences have not grown in recent years, and for the most part pale in comparison to the overwhelming partisan divide we see today.

In recent years, both parties have become smaller and more ideologically homogeneous. Republicans are dominated by self-described conservatives, while a smaller but growing number of Democrats call themselves liberals. Among Republicans, conservatives continue to outnumber moderates by about two-to-one. And there are now as many liberal Democrats as moderate Democrats.

But the growing partisan divide over political values is not simply the result of the declining number who identify with the party labels. While many Americans have given up their party identification over the past 25 years and now call themselves independents, the polarization extends also to independents, most of whom lean toward a political party. Even when the definition of the party bases is extended to include these leaning independents, the values gap has about doubled between 1987 and 2012.

Looking ahead to the 2012 election, the largest divides between committed supporters of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are over the scope and role of government in the economic realm. Swing voters, who make up about a quarter of all registered voters, are cross-pressured. Their attitudes on the social safety net and immigration are somewhat closer to those of Romney supporters, while they tilt closer to Obama supporters in opinions about labor unions and some social issues.

In contrast to the widening partisan gap, the new survey finds neither growing class differences in fundamental political values, nor increasing class resentment. As in the past, a substantial majority of Americans agree that “the rich just get richer while the poor get poorer.” Yet there are no indications of increasing hostility toward the rich and successful. And there are no signs that lower-income people have become more cynical about an individual’s power to control their destiny or the value of hard work.

At the same time, the proportion of Americans who see a widening gap in living standards between the poor and middle class has grown since the mid-1980s. But the public sees no greater gap in values differences between the middle class and poor over this period.

The polling finds little support for the broad notion of American “declinism.” As has been the case in previous political values surveys, a large majority agrees that “as Americans we can always find a way to solve our problems and get what we want.” The public’s confidence in the nation has not been dulled, even as Americans have become more skeptical about prospects for economic growth.

These are among the principal findings of the latest Pew Research Center American Values survey, conducted April 4-15, 2012, among 3,008 adults nationwide. The values project, which began in 1987 and has been updated 14 times since then, tracks a wide range of the public’s fundamental beliefs. These questions do not measure opinions about specific policy or political questions, but rather the underlying values that ultimately shape those opinions.

Widening Gaps over Social Safety Net, Environmentalism

The survey covers the public’s attitudes on the role and performance of government, the environment, business, labor, equal opportunity, national security and several other dimensions.

Republicans are most distinguished by their increasingly minimalist views about the role of government and lack of support for environmentalism. Democrats have become more socially liberal and secular. Republicans and Democrats are most similar in their level of political engagement.

On some sets of issues, such as views of the social safety net, there already were sizable partisan gaps in Pew Research’s first political values study in 1987. But these differences have widened considerably. On others, such as measures of religiosity and social conservatism, there were only modest differences initially, but these divides also have grown.

Republicans and Democrats are furthest apart in their opinions about the social safety net. There are partisan differences of 35 points or more in opinions about the government’s responsibility to care for the poor, whether the government should help more needy people if it means adding to the debt and whether the government should guarantee all citizens enough to eat and a place to sleep.

On all three measures, the percentage of Republicans asserting a government responsibility to aid the poor has fallen in recent years to 25-year lows.

Just 40% of Republicans agree that “It is the responsibility of the government to take care of people who can’t take care of themselves,” down 18 points since 2007. In three surveys during the George W. Bush administration, no fewer than half of Republicans said the government had a responsibility to care for those unable to care for themselves. In 1987, during the Ronald Reagan’s second term, 62% expressed this view.

Over the past two decades, the public consensus in favor of tougher environmental restrictions has weakened, also primarily because of changing opinions among Republicans.

For the first time in a Pew Research Center political values survey, only about half of Republicans (47%) agree that “there needs to be stricter laws and regulations to protect the environment.” This represents a decline of 17 points since 2009 and a fall of nearly 40 points, from 86%, since 1992.

The partisan gap over this measure was modest two decades ago. Today, roughly twice as many Democrats as Republicans say stricter environmental laws and regulations are needed (93% vs. 47%).

Democrats More Secular, Socially Liberal

Yet the widening partisan divide in political values is not just the result of changing opinions among Republicans. Democrats have shifted their views in a number of areas in recent years, though less dramatically: They have become more secular, more positive in their views of immigrants and more supportive of policies aimed at achieving equal opportunity.

Roughly three-quarters of Democrats (77%) say they “never doubt the existence of God,” as do 76% of independents. The proportion of Democrats saying they never doubt God’s existence has fallen 11 points over the past decade. Among white Democrats, the decline has been 17 points – from 85% in 2002 to 68% currently.

Independents also are less likely to express firm belief in God than in the past. By contrast, the percentage of Republicans saying they never doubt God’s existence is as large today (92%) as it was a decade ago, or a quarter century ago.

There also has been a substantial decline in the share of Democrats saying they “have old-fashioned values about family and marriage.” Just 60% of Democrats currently agree, down from 70% in 2007 and 86% in the first political values survey. Republicans’ views have shown far less change: Currently, 88% say they have old-fashioned values about marriage and family.

Democratic support for doing whatever is necessary to improve the position of minorities, including the possible use of preferences, has increased in recent years. About half (52%) of Democrats agree that “We should make every effort to improve the position of blacks and other minorities, even if it means giving them preferential treatment” – an 11-point increase since 2007.

Republicans’ views have changed little over this period. Just 12% currently agree that all efforts should be taken, including the use of preferential treatment, to improve the position of minorities. Since 1987, the gap between the two parties has about doubled – from 18 points to 40 points.

Class Divides: No Wider than in 1987

While the partisan gaps in political values have increased substantially, class divisions have not. This does not mean there are not significant differences, particularly when it comes to views about whether hard work leads to success and whether success is within an individual’s control. But these differences are generally no wider today than in recent years, or than they were in the initial political values survey.

For the past 25 years, majorities across most groups have rejected the idea that “hard work offers little guarantee of success.” In the current survey, just 35% agree with this statement while 63% disagree. As in the past, those with less education and lower incomes are more likely than those with more education and higher incomes to say that hard work does not ensure success.

Currently, 45% of those with no more than a high school education agree that hard work offers little guarantee of success, compared with 25% of college graduates. The gap was about as large in Pew Research’s first political values study (35% vs.17%).

Among whites who have not completed college, 36% are skeptical that hard work guarantees success; fewer white college graduates agree (24%). The education gap among whites was comparable in 1987 (29% non-college grad, 16% college grad).

There is greater agreement across socioeconomic lines in views of the gap between the rich and poor in this country.

As has been the case in most values surveys, majorities in all educational and income groups agree that “today it’s really true that the rich just get richer while the poor get poorer.” In the current survey, 76% of the public agrees with this statement, about the same as the 74% that agreed in 1987.

Still, there is evidence that the public sees greater economic inequality today than it did in the 1980s. About six-in-ten (61%) say the gap in living standards between middle class and poor people has widened over the past 10 years, while just 28% say it has narrowed.

In a 1986 survey by Gallup and the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, just 40% said the gap in the standard of living between the middle class and poor had grown, while about as many (39%) said it had narrowed.

Yet there has been far less change in opinions about whether the values of middle class and poor people are growing apart. In the current survey, 47% say the values of the middle class and poor have gotten more similar over the past 10 years; somewhat fewer (41%) say they have gotten more different. That is little changed from the 1986 survey, when 44% said the values of each had gotten more similar and 33% more different.

Economic Views Sour, But No Decline in Optimism

The survey also finds new evidence of the toll taken by the economic downturn, both on people’s personal financial assessments and their views of the country’s economic prospects. Just 53% say they are “pretty well satisfied with the way things are going for me financially.” That matches the lowest percentage ever, reached three years ago. People with family incomes of $75,000 or more express greater satisfaction with their finances than in 2009; financial satisfaction has continued to sag among those with incomes of less than $40,000.

Only about half of Americans (51%) agree with this statement: “I don’t believe that there are any real limits to growth in this country today”; 45% disagree. That is the lowest percentage ever agreeing with this statement, down slightly from 54% in 2009. In the first political values survey, 67% said there were no limits to growth in the United States.

Despite persistent economic pessimism, however, the public remains bullish about the ability of the American people to overcome challenges. Nearly seven-in-ten (69%) agree that “As Americans, we can always find a way to solve our problems and get what we want.” While that is largely unchanged from 2009 (70%), it is up 11 points since 2007 (58%). It also is about the same percentage that agreed with this statement in the first values survey (68%).

Political Values and the 2012 Election

When the values items are combined into indices (grouping measures on common subjects, such as the social safety net, into a single scale), swing voters – who make up 23% of all registered voters – tend to fall about halfway between certain Obama voters and certain Romney voters. Swing voters are either undecided, only lean toward a candidate, or favor a candidate but say there is still a chance they will change their minds.  (For more, see “With Voters Focused on Economy, Obama Lead Narrows,” April 17, 2012).

On views about the scope and performance of government, for example, there is a wide divide between certain Obama and Romney supporters. But the attitudes of swing voters are about equidistant from backers of either candidate. The same is true on several other key indices, including views of business, the environment and national security.

Nonetheless, there are some issues on which the views of swing voters tilt slightly toward the backers of either candidate. On attitudes toward labor and social conservatism, opinion among swing voters comes somewhat closer to that of Obama voters. By contrast, on indices measuring attitudes on the social safety net and immigration, swing voters’ opinions tilt toward those of Romney supporters.

While the views of swing voters generally fall between those of certain Obama and Romney backers, there are a handful of individual questions that show agreement between swing voters and the supporters of one candidate or the other.

For example, on the power of labor unions and admiration of wealthy people, the opinions of swing voters are closer to those of Obama supporters. About half of swing voters (51%) agree that labor unions have too much power, placing them closer to the views of Obama supporters (39% agree) than Romney supporters (82%).

Just 22% of swing voters, and an identical percentage of Obama supporters, say they “admire people who are rich.” A much higher percentage of Romney supporters (38%) agree.

But swing voters are far closer to Romney voters on the question of whether the government should help more needy people even if it means going further into debt: just 19% of Romney voters and 27% of swing voters agree, compared with a 62% majority of Obama voters.

Number of Independents Continues to Grow

While Republicans and Democrats have been moving further apart in their beliefs, both groups have also been shrinking. Pew Research Center polling conducted so far in 2012 has found fewer Americans affiliating with one of the major parties than at any point in the past 25 years. And looking at data from Gallup going back to 1939, it is safe to say that there are more political independents in 2012 than at any point in the last 75 years.

Currently, 38% of Americans identify as independents, while 32% affiliate with the Democratic Party and 24% affiliate with the GOP. That is little changed from recent years, but long-term trends show that both parties have lost support.

The percentage of Americans identifying as Democrats increased from 31% in 2002, following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, to 36% in 2008. But over the past four years, Democratic affiliation has fallen to 32%. Republican identification stood at 30% in 2002, but fell to 25% in 2008 and has not recovered since then.

More Conservative Republicans, More Liberal Democrats

Over the past decade, the Republican Party has come to be dominated by conservatives, while liberals make up an increasing share of Democrats.

In surveys conducted this year, 68% of Republicans describe themselves as politically conservative. That is little changed from 2008, but is higher than in 2004 (63%) or 2000 (60%).

Demographically, Republicans remain overwhelmingly white and their average age now approaches 50. Fully 87% of Republicans are non-Hispanic whites, a figure which has changed little since 2000.

Meanwhile, the percentage of Democrats who say their political views are liberal has risen from 28% in 2000 to 34% in 2008 and 38% in 2012 surveys by the Pew Research Center. For the first time, there are as many liberal Democrats as moderate Democrats.

In contrast to Republicans, Democrats have grown increasingly diverse. A narrow majority of Democrats (55%) are non-Hispanic whites, down from 64% in 2000. As in recent years, most Democrats are women (59%). And while the average age of self-described Democrats has risen since 2008 – from 46.9 to 47.7 – Democrats continue to be younger than Republicans on average (47.7 vs. 49.7).

Independents also have become more diverse since 2000: Two-thirds of independents (67%) are non-Hispanic whites, down 12 points from 2000. The proportion of independents who are Hispanic has nearly doubled – from 9% to 16% – over this period.

A plurality of independents (43%) describes their views as moderate, while 30% are conservative and 22% are liberal. These views are largely unchanged from previous election years.

Public support for government loans to major U.S. automakers has increased sharply since 2009. Opinions are far less positive, however, about two other major initiatives to bolster the economy – the 2008 bank bailout and the 2009 stimulus plan.

Americans also are of two minds when it comes to government regulation of business. While regulations are viewed negatively in the abstract, large majorities want to maintain or even strengthen federal regulations in food production, environmental protection, automobile safety and other areas.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Feb. 8-12 among 1,501 adults, finds that 56% say the loans the government made to GM and Chrysler were mostly good for the economy, while 38% say the loans to the automakers were mostly bad for the economy.

Opinion about the auto loans has reversed since October 2009. At that time, just 37% said the loans were mostly good for the economy while 54% expressed negative views. Republicans remain more skeptical than Democrats about the GM and Chrysler loans, but Republican support for the loans has nearly doubled since 2009 – from 23% then to 44% today.

A majority of Americans (55%) say that the auto industry has a positive effect on the way things are going in the country; just 29% say it is having a negative effect. Far more say the auto industry is having a positive impact than say that about large corporations generally (28%) or banks and financial institutions (22%). However, the auto industry is not viewed as positively as small businesses (75% positive effect) or technology companies (70%).

The survey finds that while the government’s loans to automakers are viewed more positively today than in the fall of 2009, there has been less change in opinions about other major economic policies. About four-in-ten (39%) say the major loans that the government extended to banks and financial institutions during the economic crisis of 2008 were the right thing for the government to do; 52% say they were the wrong thing. These views are virtually identical to opinions two years ago.

The public is now divided over Barack Obama’s stimulus plan, which Congress passed in 2009. Overall, 37% approve of the legislation and 41% disapprove, while 23% express no opinion. Two years ago, 38% approved of the stimulus, while nearly half (49%) disapproved; 13% had no opinion.

In terms of policy proposals currently under consideration in Washington, there is far more support than opposition for building the Keystone XL pipeline that would carry oil from Canada’s oil sands to refineries in Texas. So far, this issue has not resonated widely with the public; just 24% have heard a lot about this issue, while 37% have heard nothing at all.

Still, among those who have heard at least a little about the Keystone XL pipeline, 66% say the government should approve the pipeline, while just 23% say it should not.

Republicans are far more likely than Democrats or independents to have heard about the pipeline. Among those aware of this issue, 84% of Republicans say the government should build the pipeline, while just 9% say they should not. Independents, by greater than two-to-one (66% to 27%) approve of its construction. Democrats who have heard about the pipeline also are supportive – 49% approve of building the pipeline and 33% disapprove.

Mixed Views of Government Regulation

The public has mixed attitudes about government regulation of business. Over the past year, there has been an increase in the percentage saying that, in general, government regulation of business usually does more harm than good – from 45% last March to 52% today. Four-in-ten (40%) say government regulation is necessary to protect the public interest.

At the same time, there is little support for weakening federal regulations in specific areas such as food packaging and production, environmental protection, automobile safety standards, workplace health and safety and prescription drugs.

In each of these areas, large majorities say the federal government should strengthen regulations or keep them the same as they are now. For the most part, these opinions are little changed from 1995.

Moreover, the public does not see individual business sectors as over-regulated, with one notable exception. About half (49%) say there is too much federal regulation of small businesses, compared with just 21% who say there is too little regulation and 23% who say there is the right amount of regulation.

By contrast, when it comes to large corporations, banks and financial institutions, and the oil and gas industry, pluralities say there is too little federal regulation. When it comes to the health insurance industry, however, about as many say there is too little (40%) as too much regulation (37%).

There are sharp partisan differences over the level of federal regulation in each of the business sectors included in the survey. Majorities of Republicans say each is over-regulated, while Democrats are far more likely to say there is too little regulation. For the most part, independents are closer to Democrats than Republicans.

For instance, comparable percentages of Democrats and independents say there is too little federal regulation of the oil and gas industry (56% of Democrats, 52% of independents), banks and financial institutions (50%, 54%) and the health insurance industry (50%, 48%).

The survey also finds that the public is skeptical of the federal government taking a more active role in regulating how internet companies handle privacy issues.

A 56% majority says the government should not do more to regulate how internet companies handle online privacy issues. Only about four-in-ten (38%) want to see the government become more involved in these issues.

However, Americans do not have a positive view of the way that internet companies handle privacy matters. When asked about internet companies that collect personal information for targeted ads, 59% say this is an unjustified use of people’s personal information. Just 33% view this as a fair exchange for the free internet services– such as email, search and social networking – that these companies provide.

Views of Institutions

The survey finds that the public’s views of the impact of major institutions and businesses have changed little over the past two years. Substantial majorities continue to say that small businesses (75%) and technology companies (70%) have a positive effect on the way things are going in the country. Colleges and universities (60%), churches (57%) and the auto industry (55%) also are generally viewed as having a positive impact on the country.

By contrast, just 15% say Congress is having a positive effect while 75% say it is having a negative effect. Opinions about Congress’s impact have grown even more negative since March 2010 (24% positive, 65% negative).

The public also remains highly critical of the impact of the federal government (66% negative effect) and banks and other financial institutions (68%), but these views have shown little change since March 2010.

These findings, from Pew Research’s new Political Typology survey, are consistent with past surveys showing public ambivalence about Wall Street. In April 2009, shortly after the financial meltdown, a large majority (63%) said that Wall Street made an important contribution to the economy, but about as many (67%) said that Wall Street cared only about making money for itself.

The Political Typology shows that views of Wall Street do not divide cleanly along partisan and ideological lines. Staunch Conservatives are strongly anti-government and pro-business; a large majority (72%) agrees with the Tea Party. Yet Staunch Conservatives express only modest support for Wall Street: 48% say it helps the economy more than hurts it, 39% say it hurts more than helps. (For detailed descriptions of all typology groups, see “Typology Group Profiles”).

The other core Republican group – Main Street Republicans – are more negative about Wall Street’s impact on the economy; just 36% say it helps more than it hurts, while 45% say the opposite. Main Street Republicans are socially and fiscally conservative, but are much more skeptical of business than are Staunch Conservatives.

The most positive opinions about Wall Street’s impact are seen among two groups in the middle of the typology. Majorities of Libertarians and Post-Moderns (56% each) say Wall Street helps the economy more than it hurts it. While Libertarians lean to the Republican Party, and Post-Moderns lean Democratic, both groups are well-educated and affluent.

In this regard, two of the most financially stressed groups in the typology – Hard-Pressed Democrats and Disaffecteds, Republican-leaning independents – are highly critical of Wall Street’s impact on the economy. Majorities of both groups say that Wall Street does more to hurt the economy (66% of Hard-Pressed Democrats, 59% of Disaffecteds).

Yet New Coalition Democrats, who also have relatively low family incomes but are financially optimistic, are divided: 39% say Wall Street helps the economy more than it hurts it, while 32% say it does more to hurt the economy.

Solid Liberals, who are strongly pro-government and critical of business, express negative views of Wall Street. About six-in-ten (59%) say that Wall Street does more to hurt the economy, while 32% say it helps the economy more than hurts it.

Different Views of Business Profits

Many of the typology groups express very different opinions about business than they do about Wall Street. On the question of business profits, 54% of the public says that businesses make too much profit, while 39% say that most corporations make a fair and reasonable profit.

Staunch Conservatives, who express mixed views of Wall Street, overwhelmingly see corporate profits as reasonable (by 78% to 13%). But Main Street Republicans are highly critical of corporate profits; 58% say businesses make too much profit, while only about a third (34%) say most corporations make a fair profit.

The predominant view among Libertarians, like Staunch Conservatives, is that business profits are fair and reasonable (83%). But Post-Moderns, who express positive views of Wall Street, are more skeptical about corporate profits; a narrow majority (52%) says that profits are excessive while 41% see them as fair and reasonable.

Just as New Coalition Democrats are less negative about Wall Street than are other financially stressed groups, so too are they less critical of corporate profits. Fewer than four-in-ten (38%) say that businesses make too much profit, only about half the percentages of Hard-Pressed Democrats (79%) and Disaffecteds (73%) who say this.

Solid Liberals, who are critical of Wall Street’s impact, are even more critical of business profits. As is the case with many issues, Solid Liberals’ views of business profits are diametrically opposed to Staunch Conservatives’ – 77% say corporate profits are excessive while just 17% say most businesses make a fair profit.

With the economy still struggling and the nation involved in multiple military operations overseas, the public’s political mood is fractious. In this environment, many political attitudes have become more doctrinaire at both ends of the ideological spectrum, a polarization that reflects the current atmosphere in Washington.

Yet at the same time, a growing number of Americans are choosing not to identify with either political party, and the center of the political spectrum is increasingly diverse. Rather than being moderate, many of these independents hold extremely strong ideological positions on issues such as the role of government, immigration, the environment and social issues. But they combine these views in ways that defy liberal or conservative orthodoxy.

For political leaders in both parties, the challenge is not only one of appeasing ideological and moderate “wings” within their coalitions, but rather holding together remarkably disparate groups, many of whom have strong disagreements with core principles that have defined each party’s political character in recent years.

The most visible shift in the political landscape since Pew Research’s previous political typology in early 2005 is the emergence of a single bloc of across-the-board conservatives. The long-standing divide between economic, pro-business conservatives and social conservatives has blurred. Today, Staunch Conservatives take extremely conservative positions on nearly all issues – on the size and role of government, on economics, foreign policy, social issues and moral concerns. Most agree with the Tea Party and even more very strongly disapprove of Barack Obama’s job performance. A second core group of Republicans – Main Street Republicans – also is conservative, but less consistently so.

On the left, Solid Liberals express diametrically opposing views from the Staunch Conservatives on virtually every issue. While Solid Liberals are predominantly white, minorities make up greater shares of New Coalition Democrats – who include nearly equal numbers 0f whites, African Americans and Hispanics – and Hard-Pressed Democrats, who are about a third African American. Unlike Solid Liberals, both of these last two groups are highly religious and socially conservative. New Coalition Democrats are distinguished by their upbeat attitudes in the face of economic struggles.

Independents have played a determinative role in the last three national elections. But the three groups in the center of the political typology have very little in common, aside from their avoidance of partisan labels. Libertarians and Post-Moderns are largely white, well-educated and affluent. They also share a relatively secular outlook on some social issues, including homosexuality and abortion. But Republican-oriented Libertarians are far more critical of government, less supportive of environmental regulations, and more supportive of business than are Post-Moderns, most of whom lean Democratic.

Disaffecteds, the other main group of independents, are financially stressed and cynical about politics. Most lean to the Republican Party, though they differ from the core Republican groups in their support for increased government aid to the poor. Another group in the center, Bystanders, largely consign themselves to the political sidelines and for the most part are not included in this analysis.

These are the principal findings of the political typology study by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, which sorts Americans into cohesive groups based on values, political beliefs, and party affiliation. The new study is based on two surveys with a combined sample of 3,029 adults, conducted Feb. 22-Mar. 14, 2011 and a smaller callback survey conducted April 7-10, 2011 with 1,432 of the same respondents.

This is the fifth typology created by the Pew Research Center since 1987. Many of the groups identified in the current analysis are similar to those in past typologies, reflecting the continuing importance of a number of key beliefs and values. But there are a number of critical differences as well.

The new groupings underscore the substantial political changes that have occurred since the spring of 2005, when the previous typology was released. Today, there are two core Republican groups, compared with three in 2005, to some extent reflecting a decline in GOP party affiliation. However, Democrats have not made gains in party identification. Rather, there has been a sharp rise in the percentage of independents – from 30% in 2005 to 37% currently. Today, there are three disparate groups of independents, compared with two in 2005.

While Republicans trail the Democrats in party affiliation, they enjoy advantages in other areas: The two core GOP groups are more homogenous – demographically and ideologically – than are the three core Democratic groups. And socioeconomic differences are more apparent on the left: Nearly half of Solid Liberals (49%) are college graduates, compared with 27% of New Coalition Democrats and just 13% of Hard-Pressed Democrats.

The GOP still enjoys an intensity advantage, which proved to be a crucial factor in the Republicans’ victories in the 2010 midterm elections. For example, the GOP’s core groups – Staunch Conservatives and Main Street Republicans – express strongly negative opinions about last year’s health care legislation, while reactions among the Democratic groups are more mixed. Even Solid Liberals offer only tepid support for the bill – 43% say it will have a mostly positive impact on the nation’s health care, while somewhat more (51%) say it will have a mixed effect.

However, maintaining solid support among the GOP-oriented groups in the center of the typology represents a formidable challenge for Republicans. The cross-pressured Disaffecteds highlight this challenge. They were an important part of the GOP coalition in 2010, but were lackluster supporters of John McCain two years earlier.

Like the core GOP groups, most Disaffecteds (73%) view government as nearly always wasteful and inefficient. At the same time, a solid majority of Disaffecteds (61%) say the government should do more to help needy Americans even if that means going deeper into debt.

Libertarians, the other Republican-leaning group, overwhelmingly oppose expanding aid for the poor if it means increasing the nation’s debt. Yet on immigration and homosexuality, Libertarians’ views differ markedly from those of the core Republican groups. Fully 71% of Libertarians say homosexuality should be accepted by society; nearly as many Staunch Conservatives (68%) say it should be discouraged.

Many of the political values and attitudes of Post-Moderns, young, Democratically-oriented independents, fit awkwardly with those of core Democratic groups. Post-Moderns overwhelmingly voted for Obama in 2008, but their turnout fell off dramatically last fall, which contributed to the Democrats’ poor showing in the midterms. Compared with the core Democratic groups, Post-Moderns are less supportive of increased aid for the needy and are far less likely to view racial discrimination as the main obstacle to African American progress.

Partisan Dividing Line: Views of Government

The new typology finds a deep and continuing divide between the two parties, as well as differences within both partisan coalitions. But the nature of the partisan divide has changed substantially over time.

More than in the recent past, attitudes about government separate Democrats from Republicans, and it is these beliefs that are most correlated with political preferences looking ahead to 2012. In 2005, at the height of the Iraq war and shortly after an election in which national security was a dominant issue, opinions about assertiveness in foreign affairs almost completely distinguished Democrats from Republicans. Partisan divisions over national security remain, but in an era when the public’s focus is more inward-looking, they are less pronounced.

As in recent years, beliefs about the environment, business, immigration and the challenges faced by African Americans are important fissures between the parties, though to some extent within them as well.

In general, there is far more agreement across the two core GOP groups than the three core Democratic groups. Staunch Conservatives and Main Street Republicans express highly critical opinions about government performance and are both deeply skeptical of increased government aid to the poor if it means adding to the debt.

Yet Staunch Conservatives have much more positive opinions about business than do Main Street Republicans. Attitudes about the environment also divide the two core GOP groups: 92% of Staunch Conservatives say that stricter environmental laws cost too many jobs and hurt the economy; just 22% of Main Street Republicans agree.

The differences among core Democratic groups show up across a wider range of fundamental political values. Social and moral issues divide Solid Liberals, who are more secular, from other Democratic groups who are much more religious.

Opinions about business, immigration and the economic impact of environmental laws and regulations also divide the Democratic groups. For instance, more than half of Hard-Pressed Democrats (54%) say that stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy; just 22% of New Coalition Democrats and 7% of Solid Liberals share this view.

Race and ethnicity are factors in some of the opinion differences among Democrats. New Coalition Democrats, who are roughly a quarter Hispanic, have positive views of immigrants. Fully 70% say immigrants strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents.

Hard-Pressed Democrats – who are mostly white and African American – take a dim view of immigrants’ contributions. Just 13% say immigrants strengthen the country, while 76% say they are a burden because they take jobs and health care.

Age also is a factor in partisanship and political values. Younger people are more numerous on the left, and older people on the right. However, many young people think of themselves as independents rather than as Democrats. Post-Moderns, Democratic-oriented independents, are by far the youngest group in the typology, but they often deviate from traditional Democratic orthodoxy and are not consistent voters.

Older people, who have increasingly voted Republican in recent years, are found disproportionately in the Staunch Conservative bloc – 61% are 50 or older. And this group is highly politically engaged; 75% say they follow government and public affairs most of the time.

Staunch Conservatives also include by far the largest share of Tea Party supporters – 72% of Staunch Conservatives agree with the movement. The Tea Party’s appeal is deeper than it is wide. There is no other typology group in which a majority agrees with the Tea Party. Aside from Staunch Conservatives, Libertarians are most supportive (44% agree).

The survey suggests that while the Tea Party is a galvanizing force on the right, strong disapproval of Barack Obama is an even more powerful unifying factor among fervent conservatives. No fewer than 84% of Staunch Conservatives strongly disapprove of Obama’s job performance and 70% rate him very unfavorably personally. Ardent support for Obama on the left is no match for this – 64% of Solid Liberals strongly approve of him, and 45% rate him very favorably.

More than two years into office, Obama’s personal image is positive though his job approval ratings are mixed. Yet doubts about Obama’s background and biography persist. More than one-in-five Americans (23%) say, incorrectly, that Obama was born outside the United States; another 22% are not sure where Obama was born. Nearly half of Staunch Conservatives (47%) and 35% of Main Street Republicans say that Obama was born in another country. Only among Solid Liberals is there near total agreement that Obama was, in fact, born in the United States (95%). (NOTE: The survey was conducted before President Obama released his long-form birth certificate on April 27.)

Other Major Findings

• Majorities in most typology groups say the country will need both to cut spending and raise taxes to reduce the budget deficit. Staunch Conservatives are the exception – 59% say the focus should only be on cutting spending.
• Core GOP groups largely prefer elected officials who stick to their positions rather than those who compromise. Solid Liberals overwhelmingly prefer officials who compromise, but the other two Democratic groups do not.
• For Staunch Conservatives it is still “Drill, Baby, Drill” – 72% say that expanding exploration for and production of oil, coal and natural gas is the more important energy priority. In most other typology groups, majorities say developing alternatives is more important.
• Republican groups say the Supreme Court should base rulings on its interpretation of the Constitution “as originally written.” Democratic groups say the Court should base its rulings on what the Constitution means today.
• Main Street Republicans and GOP-oriented Disaffecteds are far more likely than Staunch Conservatives or Libertarians to favor a significant government role in reducing childhood obesity.
• Solid Liberals are the only typology group in which a majority (54%) views democracy as more important than stability in the Middle East. Other groups say stable governments are more important or are divided on this question.
• New Coalition Democrats are more likely than the other core Democratic groups to say that most people can make it if they are willing to work hard.
• More Staunch Conservatives regularly watch Fox News than regularly watch CNN, MSNBC and the nightly network news broadcasts combined.
• There are few points on which all the typology groups can agree, but cynicism about politicians is one. Majorities across all eight groups, as well as Bystanders, say elected officials lose touch with the people pretty quickly.
• Staunch Conservatives overwhelmingly want to get tougher with China on economic issues. Across other typology groups, there is far more support for building stronger economic relations with China.
• The allied airstrikes in Libya divide Democratic groups. Solid Liberals and New Coalition Democrats favor the airstrikes, but about as many Hard-Pressed Democrats favor as oppose the operation.
• Michelle Obama is popular with Main Street Republicans, as well as most other typology groups. But Staunch Conservatives view the first lady unfavorably – and 43% view her very unfavorably.

Making the Typology

The 2011 typology divides the public into eight politically engaged groups, along with a ninth group of less engaged Bystanders. It is the fifth of its kind, following on previous studies in 1987, 1994, 1999 and 2005.

Using a statistical procedure called cluster analysis, individuals are assigned to one of the eight core typology groups based on their position on nine scales of social and political values – each of which is determined by responses to two or three survey questions – as well as their party identification. Several different cluster solutions were evaluated for their effectiveness in producing cohesive groups that are distinct from one another, substantively meaningful and large enough in size to be analytically practical. The final solution selected to produce the political typology was judged to be strongest from a statistical point of view and to be most persuasive from a substantive point of view. As in past typologies, a measure of political attentiveness and voting participation was used to extract the “Bystander” group, people who are largely not engaged or involved in politics, before performing the cluster analysis.

For a more complete description of the methodology used to create the typology, see About the Political Typology. For more information about the survey methodology seen About the Surveys.

The public remains deeply frustrated with the federal government, but fewer Americans say they are angry at government than did so last fall. Overall, the percentage saying they are angry with the federal government has fallen from 23% last September to 14% today, with much of the decline coming among Republicans and Tea Party supporters.

While anger at government has subsided, the public expresses no greater taste for political compromise today than it did last fall. As political leaders head into a tough political debate over the budget, 54% say they like elected officials who stick to their positions, while 40% prefer officials who make compromises with people they disagree with. This is virtually identical to the balance of opinion among registered voters last September.

By roughly two-to-one (63% vs. 32%), more Republicans say they like elected officials who stick to their positions rather than those who make compromises. About half of independents (53%) prefer politicians who stick to their positions compared with 41% who like elected officials who make compromises with people they disagree with. Democrats are evenly divided – 48% like elected officials who stick to their positions, 46% like those who compromise.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Feb. 22-Mar. 1 among 1,504 adults, finds a modest recovery in public trust in government from historic lows last year. Yet even with this uptick, the general mood remains overwhelmingly negative.

Just 29% say they can trust the government in Washington to do what is right just about always or most of the time, up from 22% last March. About seven-in-ten (69%) say they trust the government only some of the time or never, compared with 76% a year ago.

The proportion of Republicans saying they can trust the government always or most of the time has increased from 13% to 24% over the past year; opinions among Democrats are unchanged over this period, at 34%.

The public continues to express negative views of Congress, as well as Republican and Democratic congressional leaders. Just 34% say they have a favorable opinion of Congress, up slightly from 26% a year ago; a majority (57%) has an unfavorable view. Comparable percentages say they approve of the job performance of Republican (36%) and Democratic (33%) congressional leaders.

By contrast, Barack Obama’s job ratings remain positive. Currently, 51% approve of Barack Obama’s job performance while 39% disapprove. That is little changed from early February, but Obama’s ratings have shown significant improvement since last fall, when about as many approved as disapproved.

The survey finds a continuing rise in support for same-sex marriage since 2009. Currently, 45% say they favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally while 46% are opposed. In Pew Research surveys conducted in 2010, 42% favored and 48% opposed gay marriage and in 2009, just 37% backed same-sex marriage while 54% were opposed.

Over the same period, there has been movement toward a liberal position on abortion. In 2009, for the first time in many years, the public was evenly divided over whether abortion should be legal or illegal in all or most cases. But support for legal abortion has recovered and now stands at about the same level as in 2008 (55% then, 54% today).

Independents have become more supportive of both gay marriage and legal abortion since 2009. Roughly half of independents (51%) now favor same-sex marriage, up from 37% in 2009. And 58% of independents say that abortion should be legal in all or most cases, compared with 47% in Pew Research Center surveys two years ago.

The public’s overall views of labor unions have changed little through the lengthy stalemate between Wisconsin’s governor and the state’s public employee unions over collective bargaining rights. About half (47%) say they have a favorable opinion of labor unions compared with 39% who have an unfavorable opinion. In early February, 45% expressed a favorable opinion of unions and 41% said they had an unfavorable view. However, liberal Democrats and people in union households are more likely to say they have a very favorable opinion of labor unions than they were just weeks ago. (For more on public attitudes toward labor unions, see Pew Research’s Feb. 17 report. For more on views of the showdown in Wisconsin between the governor and public employee unions, see this report, released Feb. 28.)

By a modest margin, more say they back Wisconsin’s public employee unions rather than the state’s governor in their continuing dispute over collective bargaining rights. Roughly four-in-ten (42%) say they side more with the public employee unions, while 31% say they side more with the governor, Scott Walker, according to the latest Pew Research Center survey, conducted Feb. 24-27 among 1,009 adults.

In Washington, meanwhile, prospects for an imminent government shutdown decreased as Republicans and Democrats neared a short-term budget deal. However, the public is divided over who would be more to blame if the federal government were to shut down as a result of a budget impasse: 36% say Republicans would be more to blame, 35% say the Obama administration and 17% volunteer that both would be to blame. This question was asked jointly by the Pew Research and The Washington Post.

Opinions are notably different today than they were the last time a budget battle threatened a government shutdown. In November 1995, a Washington Post/ABC News survey asked a similar question and found that 46% said a possible government shutdown would be mainly the Republicans’ fault; just 27% said the bulk of the blame would fall on the Clinton administration.

The differences in opinions between now and then may well be more linked to changes in views of the GOP House Speaker rather than the Democratic president. Obama’s current approval rating of 49% is about the same as Bill Clinton’s in October 1995 (48%).

But the current House Speaker, John Boehner, is viewed far less negatively than Newt Gingrich was in 1995. In December 2010, 28% expressed a favorable opinion of Boehner while 25% had an unfavorable view. In August 1995, a few months before the budget impasse, 30% had a favorable view of Gingrich while 54% had an unfavorable opinion.

Democrats, Young, Less Affluent Side Strongly With Unions

Democrats overwhelmingly side with the government employee unions in the ongoing dispute in Wisconsin. Two- thirds (67%) say this, compared with just 12% who say they side more with the governor. About half of Republicans (53%) say they side more with Gov. Walker; 17% say they side more with the public employee unions. Independents are evenly divided (39% side more with the unions, 34% more with the governor).

Among those ages 18 to 29, nearly half (46%) say they side more with the public employee unions, while 13% say they side with the governor. Among those 65 and older, the balance is reversed – but the gap more narrow (45% say they side more with the governor, 33% with the unions).

While whites are nearly evenly divided (38% unions, 36% governor), non-white people are much more likely to say they side more with the unions that represent public employee workers (51% vs. 19%).

And while those with household incomes of $75,000 or more are divided (36% side more with the unions, 40% with the governor), those earning less clearly side more with the government employee unions. Among those with family income of less than $30,000, 46% say they side more with the unions, while 20% say they side more with the governor.

Partisan Divide on Potential Blame for Federal Shutdown

Looking at the possibility of a federal government shutdown if Republicans and the Obama administration cannot agree on a budget, partisans on both sides would put the bulk of the blame on the opposing party.

About seven-in-ten Republicans (69%) say the administration would be most to blame. Just 8% would blame their own party’s leaders. More than six-in-ten Democrats (63%) say congressional Republicans would be most responsible for any shutdown, while 11% say the administration would be most to blame. Independents are divided: 32% say Republicans and 37% say the administration would be mostly to blame. Among all three groups, 17% say both would share the blame equally.

In November 1995, just days before a standoff between congressional Republicans and the Clinton administration led to a partial government shutdown, most Democrats (71%) said Republicans would be responsible for any shutdown, while a smaller majority of Republicans (57%) put the blame on Clinton. Unlike today, many more independents said they would blame the Republicans (46%) than the Clinton administration (24%).

In early January 1996, with the government in a partial shutdown, the public continued to put more blame on the Republicans, according to a second ABC News/Washington Post survey. At that point, a plurality (44%) said the GOP was mainly to blame for the shutdown, while 25% said the Clinton administration was mainly to blame and 24% blamed both sides.

The favorability ratings for labor unions remain at nearly their lowest level in a quarter century with 45% expressing a positive view. Yet the public expresses similar opinions about business corporations – 47% have a favorable impression – and this rating is also near a historic low.

Americans express mixed views of the impact of labor unions on salaries and working conditions, international competitiveness, job availability and productivity. About half (53%) say unions have had a positive effect on the salaries and benefits of union workers, while just 17% say they have had a negative effect. Views are similar about the impact of unions on working conditions for all workers (51% positive, 17% negative).

But as many say unions have a negative effect as a positive effect on workplace productivity and on the availability of good jobs in America. And more say that unions have a negative (36%) than positive (24%) impact on the ability of U.S. companies to compete internationally.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Feb. 2-7 among 1,385 adults, finds virtually no differences in opinions about private and public sector unions.

About half (48%) say they have a favorable opinion of unions that represent workers at private companies, while 37% have an unfavorable view. The figures are nearly identical for unions that represent people who work for state or local governments – 48% have a favorable impression of these unions while 40% have an unfavorable opinion.

A previous Pew Research survey on proposals for balancing state budgets found more support for decreasing the pension plans of state government employees than for cutting programs or raising taxes. Even so, only about half (47%) favored decreasing government employee pensions to balance their state’s budget; an identical percentage said their state should not do this. (See “Fewer Want Spending to Grow, But Most Cuts Remain Unpopular,” Feb. 10, 2011.)

The new survey finds there has been little change since the mid-1990s in public support for labor unions in disputes with businesses. Currently, 43% say that when they hear of such a disagreement, their first reaction is to side with businesses; about the same number (40%) say their first reaction is to side with the unions. In 1995, the balance of opinion was about the same (36% side with unions, 43% side with businesses).

Opinions also are divided when people are asked for initial reaction to a disagreement between unions and state and local governments: 44% say that when they hear of such a dispute they side with unions, compared with 38% who say they side with governments.

In general, Americans do not believe that union agreements give union workers unfair advantages over other workers. Slightly more than half (55%) say that labor agreements ensure that union workers are treated fairly, while only about a third (34%) say the agreements give union workers unfair advantages.

Government data show that labor unions have become less of a factor in the overall U.S. economy in recent decades – most notably in the private sector. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 11.9% of wage and salary workers in the United States belonged to unions in 2010. That is down slightly from the 12.3% in 2009, but much lower than the 20.1% that belonged to unions in 1983, the first year when comparable data are available. BLS also reports that now more public sector workers belong to a union than do private sector workers.

Union Favorability Still Well Below 2007

Americans’ attitudes about labor unions changed only slightly over the past year, following a sharp downturn between early 2007 and early 2010. Currently, 45% say they have a favorable opinion about labor unions, while nearly as many (41%) say they have an unfavorable opinion.

In January 2007, 58% said they had a favorable opinion of unions; 31% had an unfavorable opinion.

Young people, Democrats and people who live in union households continue to hold the most favorable views of organized labor. About six-in-ten of those 18-29 (58%) say they have a favorable opinion of unions, compared with 37% of those 65 and older. In early 2007, a much larger percentage of older Americans (60%) had a favorable opinion of unions. The decline among younger people was modest (66% to 58%).

Six-in-ten Democrats (61%) say they have a favorable opinion, compared with 30% of Republicans and 42% of independents. In early 2007, 70% of Democrats, 47% of Republicans and 54% of independents said they had a favorable opinion of unions. There are similar partisan differences in opinions about private sector unions and public employee unions.

In the current survey, there is a little difference in opinions about labor unions based on education level or household income. Among many groups – but not all – opinions dropped between 2007 and 2010 and then made up some of that decline over the past year.

African Americans continue to offer more favorable opinions about labor unions than do whites. Currently, 62% of African Americans say they have a favorable view, compared with 43% of whites. Last year, the numbers were similar (37% for whites, 59% for blacks). Favorable opinions of labor unions among both whites and blacks were higher in 2007 (54% for whites, 75% for blacks).

Not surprisingly, members of union households also continue to see unions more favorably. About seven-in-ten in union households (69%) offer a favorable opinion, compared with 42% in non-union households. That gap was somewhat wider one year ago: 74% for union households, 36% for non-union). In early 2007, more than three- quarters (77%) of those in union households expressed a favorable opinion, compared with 54% of non-union households.

Business Favorability Also Lower

Currently, 47% say they have a favorable opinion of business corporations while 45% have an unfavorable opinion. These views are unchanged since April 2008, but are substantially less positive than in January 2007 (57% favorable, 30% unfavorable). Since early 2007, the favorability ratings for business corporations have fallen by 10 points while favorable ratings for unions have fallen by 13 points.

Over the past four years, opinions about business corporations have turned more negative among Republicans, Democrats and independents. Currently, 58% of Republicans have a favorable opinion of business while 36% have an unfavorable opinion. In January 2007, 70% of Republicans viewed corporations favorably and only 18% said they had an unfavorable opinion – half the percentage as in the current survey.

The balance of opinion among independents toward business corporations moved from positive to negative between 2007 and 2008 and has changed little since then. Democrats’ views of business corporations also turned more negative between 2007 and 2008 before recovering slightly in the current survey.

Democrats Most Likely to See Union Positives

Democrats are much more likely to offer favorable opinions of unions than either Republicans or independents. Democrats also are less likely to say that unions have a negative impact on the ability of American companies to compete in a global marketplace and the availability of good jobs in the United States.

On balance, Republicans, Democrats and independents say that labor unions have had a positive effect on union workers’ salaries and benefits, as well as working conditions for all Americans workers. However, Democrats view their impact as much more positive than either of the other groups. For example, 61% of Democrats said labor unions have had a positive effect on working conditions for all American workers; 49% of independents and 42% of Republicans agree.

Republicans, though, are much more negative than Democrats about unions’ impact on America’s ability to compete globally, workplace productivity and the availability of good jobs in the U.S. Independents tend to fall in between.

Nearly half of Republicans (47%) say unions hurt American companies’ global competitiveness, compared with 26% of Democrats. Nearly four-in-ten independents (38%) say this. About four-in-ten Democrats (39%) say unions don’t have much of an effect on this. Fewer than three-in-ten Republicans (28%) or independents (26%) agree.

Higher-Income Americans See More Negative Effects

People across income levels say that labor unions have had a positive effect on both union members’ salaries and benefits and working conditions for all American workers. People with higher family incomes, however, are more critical of unions’ impact on American competitiveness and workplace productivity.

More than half of those with annual family income of $75,000 or more (54%) say that unions hurt companies’ ability to compete in a global marketplace. About four-in-ten (38%) of those earning between $30,000 and $74,999 agree, as do 22% of those earning less than $30,000. About a third in each of the lower income groups says unions do not have much of an effect on this (35% for those with income of less than $30,000, 32% for those with income between $30,000 and $74,999). Just 22% of those earning at least $75,000 a year say this.

Higher wage earners also are more likely to see a negative impact on productivity. More than four-in-ten (44%) say unions have a negative effect on workplace productivity, compared with 33% of those earning between $30,000 and $74,999 and just 19% of those earning less than $30,000.

Union Membership and Perceptions of Labor’s Impact

Households with current union members offer much more positive views on the impact of unions than those made up of former union members or people who have never belonged to a union.

For example, about half of those who say they or their spouse (52%) is currently a member of a labor union say unions have had a positive effect on the availability of good jobs in the United States. That drops to 31% among former union members and 28% among those never in a union.

Current union households also are more likely to say that unions have a positive effect on workplace productivity. Nearly half (48%) say this, compared with 34% of those in former union households and 31% among those never in a union.

More Say Union Contracts Protect Than Give Unfair Edge

A majority of the public sees union agreements as ensuring fair treatment for union workers (55%), rather than giving union workers unfair advantages (34%).

Asked which statement comes closer to their views, two-thirds of Democrats (67%) say the agreements protect union workers, while 25% say they give union workers unfair advantages. Independents show a similar balance, though not as large a divide (55% to 34%). Among Republicans, 48% say the agreements give union workers unfair advantages while 42% say they ensure fair treatment.

More than six-in-ten (63%) of those earning less than $30,000 say the agreements ensure fair treatment for union workers. Nearly as many (56%) of those earning between $30,000 and $74,999 agree. Those earning at least $75,000 are more evenly divided: 47% say unions ensure fair treatment for union workers, while 45% say they give union workers unfair advantages.

Looking at union membership, 63% of those with household members ever in a union say union agreements ensure fair treatment for union workers. Half of those in households where neither spouse has ever belonged to a union agree.